Originally Posted by Jordan
I'm surprised you don't think the 24-105 is sharp. It's one of my sharpest lenses. Yes, it's not as sharp as my 70-200 f/4 IS, but keep in mind that the 24-105 is a wide-to-tele 4x zoom, whereas the 70-200 is a tele-to-tele 3x zoom. And, yes, it is a bit soft in the long end, but I personally appreciate the extra reach when I don't want to carry the 70-200.
...at probably $2,000 and with 50% more weight than the 24-105. Nah, I'll stick to my 24-105 me thinks. []
No, it's not. Yes, IQ is supposed to be very good. But build quality seems to be similar to the 10-22, which I've always found to be subpar for $700 (and at $1,000 for the 17-55 I'd expect nothing but outstanding build quality). I recently dropped my 24-105 from a non-trivial height; it just carried on working and hasn't shown any issues since. I'm sure the 17-55 would have ended up in pieces...
Chris, I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. Why if you can handhold the 24-70 at a certain shutter speed, you cannot do the same with the 24-105? The IS on the latter is wonderful. I've got down to 1/4sec with it on a few occasions and I managed to get great and sharp results. Yes, I had to shoot a few frames to make sure I get at least one good one, but without IS I would have got no good ones.
1/4 sec:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/USA---Air/Lockheed-SR-71A-Blackbird/1574849/L/
1/6 sec:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/US-Airways/Embraer-ERJ-190-100IGW-190AR/1625747/L/
Tony
Reply With Quote